Had drugs been decriminalized, crack would never have been invented and there would today be fewer addicts... The ghettos would not be drug-and-crime-infested no-man's lands... Colombia, Bolivia and Peru would not be suffering from narco-terror, and we would not be distorting our foreign policy because of it.
Interpretation
The quote suggests that the decriminalization of drugs could have prevented the rise of crack cocaine and its associated societal issues.
Milton Friedman argues that the decriminalization of drugs could have significantly altered social and economic conditions related to drug use and trafficking. He believes that removing legal penalties for drug use would not only have prevented the creation of crack cocaine but also alleviated the devastation it brought to communities, reduced crime rates, and altered the dynamics of international relations, particularly with drug-producing countries. The quote highlights the unintended consequences of drug criminalization and advocates for reconsideration of existing drug policies.
In practice
During a panel discussion on drug policy reform, this quote could be used to illustrate the potential benefits of decriminalization.
The economic miracle that has been the United States was not produced by socialized enterprises, by government-unon-industry cartels or by centralized economic planning. It was produced by private enterprises in a profit-and-loss system. And losses were at least as important in weeding out failures, as profits in fostering successes. Let government succor failures, and we shall be headed for stagnation and decline.
Universities exist to transmit knowledge and understanding of ideas and values to students not to provide entertainment for spectators or employment for athletes.
There is no place for government to prohibit consumers from buying products the effect of which will be to harm themselves.
There is one and only one social responsibility of business - to use it resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud.
The great danger to the consumer is the monopoly -whether private or governmental. His most effective protection is free competition at home and free trade throughout the world. The consumer is protected from being exploited by one seller by the existence of another seller from whom he can buy and who is eager to sell to him. Alternative sources of supply protect the consumer far more effectively than all the Ralph Naders of the world.
The strongest argument for free enterprise is that it prevents anybody from having too much power. Whether that person is a government official, a trade union official, or a business executive. If forces them to put up or shut up. They either have to deliver the goods, produce something that people are willing to pay for, are willing to buy, or else they have to go into a different business.
wondered how anyone could ever imagine unquiet slumbers, for the sleepers in that quiet earth.
Our destiny is to become what we think, to have our thoughts become our bodies and our bodies become our thoughts.
There is a lack of critical assessment of the past. But you have to understand that the current ruling elite is actually the old ruling elite. So they are incapable of a self-critical approach to the past.
When it comes to privacy and accountability, people always demand the former for themselves and the latter for everyone else.
We ask only to be reassured About the noises in the cellar And the window that should not have been open
Morality is nothing but a struggle for safety
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.